Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BumRushDaShow

(129,160 posts)
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 06:52 PM Mar 5

Trump requests a new trial in E. Jean Carroll defamation case

Source: NBC News

March 5, 2024, 4:18 PM EST / Updated March 5, 2024, 5:58 PM EST


Donald Trump’s attorneys on Tuesday filed a motion for a new trial in writer E. Jean Carroll's defamation case and asked a judge to cancel the judgment of $83 million against the former president.

In a federal court filing in New York, Trump attorneys Alina Habba and John Sauer wrote that a district court could grant a motion for a new trial because, they argued, relevant evidence had been excluded and the jury had been “erroneously instructed” on a key component of the case.

"This Court’s erroneous decision to dramatically limit the scope of President Trump’s testimony almost certainly influenced the jury’s verdict, and thus a new trial is warranted," the attorneys wrote.

Efforts to restrict the scope of Trump’s testimony "were erroneous and prejudicial," the attorneys added, citing when Trump took the stand and testimony about his state of mind when he made disparaging comments about Carroll was stricken from the record.

Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-requests-new-trial-e-jean-carroll-defamation-case-rcna141935



How many times has this been? I have now lost count.

Article finally updated.

Original article -

March 5, 2024, 4:18 PM EST


Donald Trump’s attorneys on Tuesday filed a motion for a new trial in writer E. Jean Carroll's defamation case and asked a judge overseeing the case to cancel the judgment of $83 million dollars against the former president.

Trump attorneys Alina Habba and John Sauer argue that “a district court may grant a motion for a new trial if the verdict is against the weight of the evidence.” Habba also contended that the jury’s compensatory and punitive awards are out of proportion and motivated by sympathy rather than evidence and should be canceled.

Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan declined to comment.


This is a developing story.
64 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Trump requests a new trial in E. Jean Carroll defamation case (Original Post) BumRushDaShow Mar 5 OP
Is trying to get Carroll to settle for less money? Irish_Dem Mar 5 #1
"Trump's lawyers cited case law that they indicated could reduce the total damages significantly- to no more than $36.6M riversedge Mar 5 #7
Sure sounds like Trump is negotiating to pay only $36 million. Irish_Dem Mar 5 #10
No matter the amount, he will weasel out of it RainCaster Mar 6 #45
And the courts seems to let him do it. Irish_Dem Mar 6 #48
I will orangecrush Mar 6 #55
Yep. Irish_Dem Mar 6 #57
He is trying to get a new trial instead of an appeal so he doesn't have to pay his fine. Bev54 Mar 5 #27
This message was self-deleted by its author Bev54 Mar 5 #28
aren't there limitations?...................................... Lovie777 Mar 5 #2
The only way he gets a new trial is... calguy Mar 5 #3
This motion has zero chance with Judge Kaplan LetMyPeopleVote Mar 5 #4
"Defendant President Donald J Trump"??? Cadfael Mar 5 #19
"Do all his filings refer to him as such?" TwilightZone Mar 5 #20
Its all in the hope that his immunity claim melm00se Mar 5 #22
That irritates the hell out of me, too. It reinforces his ridiculous lie that he actually won the 2020 election Rhiannon12866 Mar 5 #33
Not likely to... 2naSalit Mar 6 #54
They may, but they also may not.... getagrip_already Mar 5 #5
Should be Rebl2 Mar 5 #6
There are. n/t Ms. Toad Mar 5 #36
Here's a one-word answer: NO. Oh wait. A two-word answer: FUCKING NO. Novara Mar 5 #8
Whatever she picks EndlessWire Mar 5 #13
Maybe she'll put a respectful headstone at the weed patch that is his first wife's grave at Bedminster. SunSeeker Mar 5 #34
I wonder how they got that picture EndlessWire Mar 6 #62
Well the lawn attendants at the golf course must know where it is FakeNoose Mar 6 #63
They're not getting any money from Ivana, so they don't care. nt SunSeeker Mar 6 #64
Then I want to see her put HER name on the building in HUGE letters. Irish_Dem Mar 6 #49
Oh, absolutely! EndlessWire Mar 6 #60
I'd love to see her take one of his tacky golf courses and turn it into a nature preserve.Or hell, all of them! Novara Mar 6 #50
Wait until people see what an 80 year old EndlessWire Mar 6 #61
He wants a "do over". OAITW r.2.0 Mar 5 #9
The court fined this man and told him to stop defaming Carroll. He immediately did it anyway. Midnight Writer Mar 5 #11
Can we tell him only weak men don't swim alone at night? COL Mustard Mar 5 #24
How about "Please don't fall out of a 50th story window" ? Talitha Mar 6 #44
How about the court tack on another 20 mill for obstruction? Evolve Dammit Mar 5 #12
It's civil. That means it's "preponderance of evidence" TexasBushwhacker Mar 5 #14
The better Attorneys.... SergeStorms Mar 5 #32
Who needs a good attorney when you have SCOTUS on your side? SunSeeker Mar 5 #35
Trump is probably casting around for a way to kick the civil cases up to SCOTUS... Girard442 Mar 5 #15
I thought an appellate court EndlessWire Mar 5 #16
There are a lot of similar motions. Ms. Toad Mar 5 #38
TY n/t EndlessWire Mar 6 #41
This DENVERPOPS Mar 5 #17
Translating the legalese: Aussie105 Mar 5 #18
Oh Donny Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Mar 5 #21
Cheaper than filing an appeal? Autumn Mar 5 #23
Hopefully the Jury will double the verdict. Turbineguy Mar 5 #25
And the people in Hell want ice water. Ocelot II Mar 5 #26
Witch hunt? Why yes. I'm a witch and I'm hunting. cbabe Mar 5 #29
I bet he's thinking he'll appeal to the SCOTUS. intheflow Mar 5 #30
No. SergeStorms Mar 5 #31
How many do-overs does this cocksucker get? Hotler Mar 5 #37
Punitive award is because he wouldn't shut his mouth. louis-t Mar 5 #39
Not likely to be granted. n/t Ms. Toad Mar 5 #40
why? he just owes more money after every one prodigitalson Mar 6 #42
This part jumped out at me. BobTheSubgenius Mar 6 #43
Dear god, he is exhausting. BadgerMom Mar 6 #46
Self proclained rich man cant pay his bills onetexan Mar 6 #47
I want a unicorn! Just sayin' mucifer Mar 6 #51
A Trial De Novo usually applies to unfavorable arbitration awards. no_hypocrisy Mar 6 #52
Lol. The second trial was about damages not defamation. Voltaire2 Mar 6 #53
You're not getting a second trial fat ass so pay up. Ray Bruns Mar 6 #56
The judge should reply with a red sharpie, like a 3RD grade English Teacher maxrandb Mar 6 #58
All about delays. republianmushroom Mar 6 #59

riversedge

(70,248 posts)
7. "Trump's lawyers cited case law that they indicated could reduce the total damages significantly- to no more than $36.6M
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 07:30 PM
Mar 5

When Carroll's lawyer responds--if she does==I would say--suck it up big boy!!



Trump requests a new trial in E. Jean Carroll defamation case
Trump's attorneys argued that the jury’s compensatory and punitive awards are out of proportion and should be canceled.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-requests-new-trial-e-jean-carroll-defamation-case-rcna141935
................

..................

"President Trump’s testimony about his own state of mind is the most relevant and probative evidence on the issue of common-law malice, and he was uniquely positioned to address it," his attorneys wrote.

"By erroneously foreclosing any such testimony—and erroneously striking the one sentence of President Trump’s testimony on this point—the Court all but assured that the jury would make a baseless punitive-damages award," they added.

Trump's attorneys further argued that U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan’s jury instruction on common-law malice was erroneous, because it "does not require a showing that intent to injury was the sole...motivation for the challenged statements" that they contend is required by New York law.


Carroll attorney Roberta Kaplan declined to comment on Tuesday's filing.

Trump's attorneys contended that the jury’s compensatory and punitive awards are out of proportion and motivated by sympathy rather than evidence and should be canceled. They argued that the $11 million award for reputational harm "is disproportionately high" compared to similar cases and should also be canceled.

In their filing, Trump's lawyers cited case law that they indicated could reduce the total damages significantly — to no more than $36.6 million.

Irish_Dem

(47,144 posts)
10. Sure sounds like Trump is negotiating to pay only $36 million.
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 07:41 PM
Mar 5

He is saying if I take you back to court, you will get no more than $36 million.
Plus you will have legal fees and hassle as I threaten and bully you even more.

So take this offer or else.

Bev54

(10,055 posts)
27. He is trying to get a new trial instead of an appeal so he doesn't have to pay his fine.
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 10:28 PM
Mar 5

Like the judges can't see right through this bullshit!

Response to Irish_Dem (Reply #1)

calguy

(5,316 posts)
3. The only way he gets a new trial is...
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 06:59 PM
Mar 5

When he defames her again and she sues him a third time. That's the only way he gets back in Court with her.

And it's looking like he doesn't have the cash to put up to appeal the last decision against him. I think tomorrow is his last day to put up the money, otherwise Ms Carroll and her very competent lawyers will go shopping for which golf course motel they want to take away from him.

Cadfael

(1,297 posts)
19. "Defendant President Donald J Trump"???
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 09:03 PM
Mar 5

Defendant President???

Do all his filings refer to him as such? How pathetic.

TwilightZone

(25,472 posts)
20. "Do all his filings refer to him as such?"
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 09:09 PM
Mar 5

Yes, his lawyers have been doing that in all the cases, as far as I know. I agree - it is pathetic.

melm00se

(4,993 posts)
22. Its all in the hope that his immunity claim
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 09:47 PM
Mar 5

is supported.

"I am President and have total immunity and all my filings say that..."

Rhiannon12866

(205,552 posts)
33. That irritates the hell out of me, too. It reinforces his ridiculous lie that he actually won the 2020 election
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 10:51 PM
Mar 5

getagrip_already

(14,766 posts)
5. They may, but they also may not....
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 07:03 PM
Mar 5

Lol.

Which do you think judge Kaplan, who has been pillaried, doxed, threatened, and disparaged, will choose?

Which do you think an appellate court would choose?

Yeah. Alina has a few ethical problems coming her way she should be more worried about.

Novara

(5,844 posts)
8. Here's a one-word answer: NO. Oh wait. A two-word answer: FUCKING NO.
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 07:31 PM
Mar 5

On Friday Ms. Carroll gets to pick a property she'd like to liquidate. Which one is (honestly) worth $83 million?

EndlessWire

(6,538 posts)
13. Whatever she picks
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 08:09 PM
Mar 5

I'd like to see a video of the taking down of Trump's name from the building or golf course.

EndlessWire

(6,538 posts)
62. I wonder how they got that picture
Wed Mar 6, 2024, 01:08 PM
Mar 6

but if it's real, I can't imagine why her children would allow her grave to become like that. Such utter disrespect. I don't think any of them are capable of love.

Unless she isn't there after all.

FakeNoose

(32,656 posts)
63. Well the lawn attendants at the golf course must know where it is
Wed Mar 6, 2024, 01:23 PM
Mar 6

That's probably who took the photo, one of the attendants. (that's my guess) Funny thing is, Ivana was cremated and her ashes are probably on somebody's mantle now. One of her kids maybe?

This gravesite is all for show anyway, plus it got Chump a large tax write-off. If she were really buried there, the Chump kiddies would have insisted on a nice memorial stone, if nothing else.

Novara

(5,844 posts)
50. I'd love to see her take one of his tacky golf courses and turn it into a nature preserve.Or hell, all of them!
Wed Mar 6, 2024, 07:54 AM
Mar 6

Midnight Writer

(21,770 posts)
11. The court fined this man and told him to stop defaming Carroll. He immediately did it anyway.
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 07:45 PM
Mar 5

He is the kind of person that you can tell to not stare into the sun, and he will do it anyway just so he can prove he can't be told what to do.

Exactly the kind of man who is dangerous in leadership.

If his top people tell him it is insane to bomb Mexico or nuke a hurricane, will he do it anyway just to prove he is the big shot?

COL Mustard

(5,906 posts)
24. Can we tell him only weak men don't swim alone at night?
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 10:05 PM
Mar 5

Or run with scissors? Or stare into the sun? There must be something we can do to goad him.

Talitha

(6,597 posts)
44. How about "Please don't fall out of a 50th story window" ?
Wed Mar 6, 2024, 02:19 AM
Mar 6

Hell, I'll even 'pretty-please' it - with sugar on top.

TexasBushwhacker

(20,204 posts)
14. It's civil. That means it's "preponderance of evidence"
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 08:09 PM
Mar 5

Of course, he has shitty lawyers because he can't afford good ones.

SergeStorms

(19,204 posts)
32. The better Attorneys....
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 10:51 PM
Mar 5

won't touch him with 7,000 mile pole.

He's a nightmare as a client, and then there's those little matters of not paying Attorneys who've represented him.

The "better" Attorneys didn't get "better" by being stupid. They'll all have too many paying clients already, or a conflict of interests.

The only Attorneys Trump can get now are those looking for publicity. It's either represent Trump, or buy ads on benches near bus stops.

SunSeeker

(51,574 posts)
35. Who needs a good attorney when you have SCOTUS on your side?
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 11:07 PM
Mar 5

SCOTUS came up with that whole "Congress must be the one to enforce Section 3" lifeline to Trump without Trump's attorneys having even briefed it!

Girard442

(6,081 posts)
15. Trump is probably casting around for a way to kick the civil cases up to SCOTUS...
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 08:11 PM
Mar 5

...who will then vacate the judgements against him. No legit way that could happen, you say? Yeah, well...

EndlessWire

(6,538 posts)
16. I thought an appellate court
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 08:20 PM
Mar 5

was the only one who could reduce damages? Didn't he already get turned down for a new trial? Isn't that asked for at the end of a trial, not when damages are due to be paid up?? It seems to me that, because Trump cannot pay, he's just trying to get out of the original court what he would otherwise have to ask of the appellate court--but he can't, because he hasn't got enough money.

I suppose any Judge can amend his own orders, but aren't they loathe to tamper with a jury finding? If the Orange Turd was not so vindictive, mean, and a big mouth, he could have avoided all of this by giving up the defamation of a woman he sexually molested. (I think it's rape, but we don't have to go there.)

The attorney is also entitled to be paid. This would be a hardship on the victim in this case. Maybe they can ask for further sanctions? Who's gonna pay that? Trump??

Ms. Toad

(34,076 posts)
38. There are a lot of similar motions.
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 11:37 PM
Mar 5

Both motions for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) and a motion for a new trial can be filed after the judgment is entered. I've lost track of what he filed earlier in which trial. But a JNOV would set aside the jury verdict (and you're right judges don't like to do that). A new trial would just be a do-over, but there is very little chance of that being granted. Both of those are motions to the original court. He can also file an appeal to a different (higher) court - and he is signalling that he believes there is a basis for an appellate court to lower the punitive awards. There are often limits on punitive awards.

Parties can't get sanctioned for filing motions they are entitled to file, unless the motion is so frivolous that there is no basis in law or fact for the motion (i.e. it has to pass the laugh test). The delay will add interest to what Trump will ultimately pay her.

Aussie105

(5,405 posts)
18. Translating the legalese:
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 08:50 PM
Mar 5

This is Trump saying . . . Witch hunt! Not fair! Too much!
I want a do-over - and many more until I get the answer I want!

Stupid still thinks he is calling the shots!

louis-t

(23,295 posts)
39. Punitive award is because he wouldn't shut his mouth.
Tue Mar 5, 2024, 11:37 PM
Mar 5

What is this "new evidence"? Another Russian operative with another big lie? It's getting pretty old.

BobTheSubgenius

(11,564 posts)
43. This part jumped out at me.
Wed Mar 6, 2024, 01:45 AM
Mar 6

"Habba also contended that the jury’s compensatory and punitive awards are out of proportion and motivated by sympathy..."

Just like any courtroom win that Habba could ever hope for would be predicated on sympathy, rather than any astute legal work or argument.

BadgerMom

(2,771 posts)
46. Dear god, he is exhausting.
Wed Mar 6, 2024, 04:05 AM
Mar 6

It’s never over when it’s over. I read that the Biden team doesn’t think Trump will accept defeat in November. No kidding. I hope they have some ideas about how to shut down his whininess. I am so, so sick of him. I can only imagine how E Jean Carroll feels.

onetexan

(13,044 posts)
47. Self proclained rich man cant pay his bills
Wed Mar 6, 2024, 05:50 AM
Mar 6

Or won't. The judge just needs to seize his assets and be done w his shenanigans.

no_hypocrisy

(46,130 posts)
52. A Trial De Novo usually applies to unfavorable arbitration awards.
Wed Mar 6, 2024, 08:02 AM
Mar 6
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/trial_de_novo#:~:text=A%20trial%20de%20novo%20is,are%20supported%20by%20constitutional%20considerations.

A trial de novo is a new trial on an entire case, where both questions of fact and issues of law are determined as if there had been no trial in the first instance. A trial de novo is typically used to challenge awards found in arbitration and are supported by constitutional considerations. Indeed, while courts allow compulsory arbitration as a means of promoting expeditious resolution of smaller cases on the merits, they also must permit an unsuccessful party who participated in the compulsory arbitration to demand a trial de novo given the constitutional right to a jury trial.

Voltaire2

(13,079 posts)
53. Lol. The second trial was about damages not defamation.
Wed Mar 6, 2024, 08:10 AM
Mar 6

That he sexually assaulted her and then defamed her was already settled.

maxrandb

(15,336 posts)
58. The judge should reply with a red sharpie, like a 3RD grade English Teacher
Wed Mar 6, 2024, 11:52 AM
Mar 6

I know he won't, but a guy can dream, can't he?

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Trump requests a new tria...